No. 16 Seeds Are Due*

*OK, not really (see: gambler’s fallacy). But they’ve been unlucky.

Florida Gulf Coast’s Marc Eddy Norelia in the second half of their play-in game Tuesday against Fairleigh Dickinson in Dayton, Ohio.

John Minchillo / AP

It’s the sort of statistic that seems ripped from pages of the Washington Generals media guide. Since the men’s NCAA Tournament went to a 64-team format in 1985, No. 16 seeds are winless: an imperfect 0-124 record.

No. 16 seeds can be pretty bad basketball teams, of course. Often, they’re teams from small conferences that won automatic bids by winning their conference tournament in a series of upsets after having barely cleared .500 during the regular season. (Small-conference teams that win both the regular season and their conference tournaments will usually wind up with No. 13, 14 or 15 seeds instead.) Furthermore, No. 16s have the misfortune of being matched up against No. 1 seeds, which are theoretically the four best teams in the country.

But being bad is one thing; going 0 for 124 is another. My hunch is that No. 16 seeds have been unlucky not to have pulled off at least one upset.

Meanwhile, plenty of No. 15 seeds have won. Well, not plenty, but seven of them have upset No. 2 seeds. And No. 14 seeds have beaten No. 3 seeds 20 times. These results suggest that 16-versus-1 upsets ought to be possible, especially because there isn’t always a whole lot of daylight separating teams from one seed to the next. As its choices this year made clear, the selection committee is not infallible. Sometimes a team gets seeded as a 16 when it should probably have been a 14 or 15. Sometimes a No. 1 seed should have been a No. 2 seed. If a No. 15 seed can beat a No. 2 seed, then surely a 15-seed that’s mis-seeded as 16 can beat a 2-seed that’s mis-seeded as a No. 1.

Here, then, is how Elo would have forecast every past 1-versus-16 matchup on the day it was played. Once we figure out the No. 1 seed’s odds of winning each game, we can simply multiply the probabilities to figure out their cumulative odds of winning all 124. It’s a long table, so scroll down to the bottom for the punch line.

CHANCE THAT NO. 1 SEED WINS …

YEAR

NO. 1 SEED

ELO

NO. 16 SEED

ELO

THIS GAME

CUM. GAMES

1985

Georgetown

2135

Lehigh

1256

99.7%

99.7%

1985

Oklahoma

1963

North Carolina A&T

1544

95.7

95.4

1985

St. John’s

1948

Southern

1636

87.7

83.7

1985

Michigan

2024

Fairleigh Dickinson

1461

98.0

82.0

1986

Kansas

2059

North Carolina A&T

1517

97.1

79.6

1986

Duke

2116

Miss. Valley St.

1607

97.5

77.7

1986

Kentucky

2029

Davidson

1524

95.6

74.2

1986

St. John’s

2006

Montana St.

1540

94.4

70.1

1987

North Carolina

2133

Pennsylvania

1492

98.8

69.3

1987

UNLV

2064

Idaho St.

1506

97.3

67.4

1987

Indiana

2007

Fairfield

1473

98.0

66.0

1987

Georgetown

2015

Bucknell

1481

97.3

64.2

1988

Purdue

2015

Fairleigh Dickinson

1502

97.5

62.6

1988

Oklahoma

2043

Chattanooga

1529

95.7

59.9

1988

Temple

2058

Lehigh

1521

97.2

58.2

1988

Arizona

2003

Cornell

1494

97.7

56.9

1989

Arizona

2117

Robert Morris

1360

99.5

56.6

1989

Oklahoma

2028

East Tennessee St.

1517

96.2

54.4

1989

Illinois

2094

McNeese St.

1509

98.5

53.6

1989

Georgetown

2055

Princeton

1531

96.7

51.9

1990

Oklahoma

2101

Towson

1504

98.6

51.1

1990

UNLV

1989

Ark.-Little Rock

1607

94.0

48.0

1990

Connecticut

2015

Boston U.

1533

96.4

46.3

1990

Michigan St.

2052

Murray St.

1607

94.5

43.8

1991

UNLV

2187

Montana

1592

98.4

43.1

1991

North Carolina

2108

Northeastern

1557

97.2

41.9

1991

Ohio St.

1997

Towson

1530

96.5

40.4

1991

Arkansas

2034

Georgia St.

1448

96.6

39.0

1992

Ohio St.

2038

Miss. Valley St.

1475

98.1

38.3

1992

Duke

2209

Campbell

1345

99.7

38.2

1992

Kansas

2106

Howard

1410

98.9

37.8

1992

UCLA

1959

Robert Morris

1485

97.0

36.6

1993

North Carolina

2147

East Carolina

1480

98.9

36.2

1993

Indiana

2130

Wright St.

1557

97.9

35.5

1993

Kentucky

2066

Rider

1427

98.8

35.1

1993

Michigan

2095

Coastal Carolina

1463

98.5

34.6

1994

Purdue

2036

Central Florida

1373

99.0

34.2

1994

Missouri

2003

Navy

1414

98.3

33.6

1994

North Carolina

2082

Liberty

1450

98.4

33.1

1994

Arkansas

2001

North Carolina A&T

1364

98.9

32.7

1995

Kansas

2049

Colgate

1479

97.7

32.0

1995

Wake Forest

2077

North Carolina A&T

1361

99.1

31.7

1995

Kentucky

2115

Mount St. Mary’s

1443

99.0

31.4

1995

UCLA

2059

Florida Intl.

1313

99.5

31.2

1996

Kentucky

2127

San Jose St.

1577

97.8

30.5

1996

Purdue

2050

Western Carolina

1539

96.8

29.5

1996

Massachusetts

2127

Central Florida

1365

99.6

29.4

1996

Connecticut

2134

Colgate

1466

98.8

29.1

1997

North Carolina

2099

Fairfield

1433

99.1

28.8

1997

Kansas

2194

Jackson St.

1451

99.2

28.6

1997

Kentucky

2181

Montana

1578

97.7

27.9

1997

Minnesota

2023

Texas St.

1423

98.3

27.4

1998

Arizona

2159

Nicholls St.

1521

98.8

27.1

1998

North Carolina

2155

Navy

1464

98.9

26.8

1998

Duke

2135

Radford

1462

98.8

26.5

1998

Kansas

2144

Prairie View

1317

99.6

26.4

1999

Auburn

1988

Winthrop

1438

97.4

25.7

1999

Connecticut

2140

Texas San Antonio

1468

98.6

25.3

1999

Duke

2295

Florida A&M

1248

99.9

25.3

1999

Michigan St.

2112

Mount St. Mary’s

1428

98.9

25.0

2000

Michigan St.

2125

Valparaiso

1470

98.8

24.7

2000

Arizona

1982

Jackson St.

1396

99.0

24.5

2000

Stanford

2092

South Carolina St.

1417

98.4

24.1

2000

Duke

2161

Lamar

1372

99.6

24.0

2001

Duke

2149

Monmouth

1544

98.6

23.7

2001

Stanford

2113

UNC-Greensboro

1459

99.1

23.4

2001

Illinois

2030

Northwestern St.

1475

98.0

23.0

2001

Michigan St.

2105

Alabama St.

1450

98.5

22.6

2002

Duke

2193

Winthrop

1411

99.5

22.5

2002

Kansas

2066

Holy Cross

1561

97.3

21.9

2002

Maryland

2110

Siena

1542

98.3

21.5

2002

Cincinnati

2055

Boston U.

1494

97.8

21.1

2003

Oklahoma

1975

South Carolina St.

1473

97.8

20.6

2003

Arizona

2069

Vermont

1481

98.5

20.3

2003

Kentucky

2149

IUPUI

1559

98.1

19.9

2003

Texas

1919

UNC-Asheville

1272

98.4

19.6

2004

Saint Joseph’s

1941

Liberty

1448

96.5

18.9

2004

Duke

2037

Alabama St.

1339

99.3

18.8

2004

Stanford

2041

Texas San Antonio

1450

98.4

18.5

2004

Kentucky

2085

Florida A&M

1421

99.0

18.3

2005

Washington

1964

Montana

1504

95.2

17.4

2005

Illinois

2132

Fairleigh Dickinson

1475

99.0

17.2

2005

North Carolina

2095

Oakland

1510

98.4

17.0

2005

Duke

2058

Delaware St.

1469

98.3

16.7

2006

Duke

2084

Southern

1431

99.1

16.5

2006

Connecticut

2109

Albany

1531

97.9

16.2

2006

Memphis

1931

Oral Roberts

1629

87.1

14.1

2006

Villanova

2035

Monmouth

1505

97.4

13.7

2007

North Carolina

2097

Eastern Kentucky

1494

98.4

13.5

2007

Ohio St.

2084

Central Conn. St.

1550

97.7

13.2

2007

Kansas

2063

Niagara

1613

95.2

12.6

2007

Florida

2046

Jackson St.

1365

98.7

12.4

2008

UCLA

2074

Miss. Valley St.

1350

99.5

12.3

2008

Kansas

2102

Portland St.

1698

95.5

11.8

2008

North Carolina

2141

Mount St. Mary’s

1563

98.3

11.6

2008

Memphis

2023

Texas Arlington

1442

98.1

11.4

2009

Connecticut

2024

Chattanooga

1503

97.4

11.1

2009

North Carolina

2103

Radford

1520

98.0

10.8

2009

Pittsburgh

2021

East Tennessee St.

1536

96.2

10.4

2009

Louisville

2059

Morehead St.

1534

97.0

10.1

2010

Kentucky

2029

East Tennessee St.

1526

96.5

9.8

2010

Kansas

2161

Lehigh

1514

99.0

9.7

2010

Duke

2059

Arkansas Pine Bluff

1422

98.7

9.5

2010

Syracuse

1986

Vermont

1619

92.6

8.8

2011

Pittsburgh

2008

UNC-Asheville

1594

94.5

8.3

2011

Duke

2117

Hampton

1475

98.7

8.2

2011

Kansas

2117

Boston U.

1570

98.1

8.1

2011

Ohio St.

2115

Texas San Antonio

1523

98.7

8.0

2012

Kentucky

2105

Western Kentucky

1476

98.5

7.9

2012

Syracuse

2054

UNC-Asheville

1619

94.9

7.5

2012

North Carolina

2059

Vermont

1629

96.0

7.2

2012

Michigan St.

2029

Long Island U.

1579

95.7

6.9

2013

Louisville

2124

North Carolina A&T

1451

99.0

6.8

2013

Gonzaga

2032

Southern

1435

98.4

6.7

2013

Kansas

2024

Western Kentucky

1499

97.7

6.5

2013

Indiana

1986

James Madison

1574

94.5

6.2

2014

Florida

2086

Albany

1554

98.0

6.0

2014

Wichita St.

2041

Cal Poly

1539

97.4

5.9

2014

Arizona

2012

Weber St.

1557

95.7

5.6

2014

Virginia

2028

Coastal Carolina

1451

97.8

5.5

2015

Villanova

2086

Lafayette

1499

98.0

5.4

2015

Kentucky

2158

Hampton

1503

99.0

5.4

2015

Duke

2028

Robert Morris

1554

96.4

5.2

2015

Wisconsin

2129

Coastal Carolina

1484

98.9

5.1

Every No. 1 vs. No. 16 men’s NCAA Tournament matchup, ever

This data suggests that No. 16 seeds have in fact been pretty unlucky. On average, Elo would have given the No. 1 seed a 97.6 percent chance of winning each individual game; the range runs from 99.9 percent (Duke against Florida A&M in 1999) to 87.1 percent (Memphis against Oral Roberts in 2006). But given 124 chances to pull a rabbit out of their hats, No. 16 seeds “should” have come away with about three victories, according to Elo. Furthermore, the probability of them having gone winless is only about 5 percent. I wouldn’t call the No. 16s phenomenally unlucky — we’re talking about odds of about 20-to-1 against, not 20,000-to-1 against — but this confirms my intuition that they haven’t caught very many breaks.

The good news for No. 16 seeds is that their situation has been improving very slightly. Since the tournament introduced its play-in game in 2001, the average No. 16 to play a No. 1 had an Elo rating of 1504; before that, their average rating was 1470. The play-in games are helpful to the cause of the No. 16 seeds in two ways. First, the truly execrable No. 16s, like Florida A&M in 1999 (which came into the tournament with a 12-18 record in the Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference), will be routed into the play-in game and will usually lose it instead of wasting one of the 16-seeds’ four opportunities. Second, the play-in winners will have a game of NCAA Tournament experience under their belts. That helps both in real life and for a team’s Elo rating, since Elo weights recent games (and especially recent tournament games) more heavily.

So cheer up, Holy Cross, Hampton, Florida Gulf Coast University and Austin Peay State. Yes, you’re probably going to lose by 30 points. But sooner or later, one of you is going to make history.